Application Of Aerial Photography And Surveillance On Behalf Of Clients

The proprietary right is protected by overriding interest under Section 70(1)(f) of Land Registration Act 1925 (LRA1925). Limitation Act 1980 stated requirement towards the squatter where he is in factual possession to the land for a period of 12 years continuously and is not objected by the land owner, he will obtain a title towards the land. However, Land Registration Act 2002 (LRA 2002) brings changes towards this proprietary right where it provides a new set of rules which

The first issue concerning UAVs deals with the inability for an opponent to surrender under the attack of a UAV strike. Additionally, I will discuss the possible increased inclination to start war

I choose the Supreme Court case United States v. Causby because initially it reminded me of the movie Burlesque. In the movie, a man named Marcus did not want the view of his penthouse to be ruined by a skyscraper being built right next to the window. So, instead of buying the land property, he bought the air rights. Owning these air rights means that he owned the air above the surface level. This is similar to this Supreme Court case because Lee Causby was suing for the disturbance being caused planes that was happening above his property, and common law doctrine said that ownership of land extends to the periphery of the universe. Lee Causby “owned a dwelling and a chicken farm near a municipal airport. The safe path of glide to one of the

obtaining land for public use, but was to prevent harm to the public. The Court

§ 75.007. TRESPASSERS. (a) In this section, "trespasser" means a person who enters the land of another without any legal right, express or implied.

Rules: The majority of jurisdictions in the United States allow for recovery in cases of trespass to land, and in this case Farmer would have grounds to file a claim for intentional tort against Pilot, as his privately owned land was trespassed on, with the action resulting in quantifiable damage to Farmer's valuable crops. The courts must decide whether or not Pilot's landing of the plane in Farmer's field constitutes an intentional act, or simply an act of negligence on Pilot's part. To do so, they must examine the three elements of trespass to land: Voluntary Act, Intent, and Damages. Another aspect of this case that the courts would consider is that of liability, as according to an article published by the Harvard Law Review, "cases of liability are those in which the defendant generates a disproportionate, excessive risk of harm, relative to the victim's risk-creating activity ... (and) a pilot or an airplane owner subjects those beneath the path of flight to nonreciprocal risks of harm" (Fletcher, 1972).

The purpose of this research paper is to show how unmanned aerial vehicles, better known as UAV’s or drones infringe on the Fourth Amendment and Due Process of the law.

In the Lucas case property was purchased on the costal area of South Carolina. When Lucas purchased the property he had the intent to build single-family homes. Under the understand of the regulation that he could not build with in three- hundred feet form the

Personally, I believe that the Court ruling in favor of the defendant was correct. I say this because the landowner did not require or ask the public for a monetary fee to use the recreational space. Therefore, according to the Recreational Use Immunity Statue (RCW 4.24.200-.210) protects the landowner from lawsuits. Unfortunately, the plaintiff was injured. However, the defendant (the landowner) is not responsible for the

To hold a landowner liable for physical harm to trespassing children, a plaintiff must prove that children, because of their youth, do not discover or realize the risk involved in intermeddling with it or in coming within the area made dangerous by it. Barnhizer v. Paradise Valley Unified Sch. Dist., 599 P.2d 209 (Ariz. 1979). If a child, while realizing the danger of his or her conduct, disregards the risk out of the spirit of bravado or

“A trespass occurs and liability is imposed with any intentional invasion of an individual’s right to the exclusive use of his or her own property.” (McAdams, 2009)

First and foremost, a few torts are primary concerns that should be looked at. For one, trespassing on someone’s property in the airspace above their property could open the business up to civil lawsuit for the tort of trespassing. Landowners have the right to exclude others from entering the property, this includes not only on the surface but above and below ground. However, the entire airspace above someone’s lands is not entirely protected by trespassing laws or air travel would not be possible. Currently, it appears that I could be consider trespassing if my drone is directly on someone’s land and the drone is not higher than a height that is reasonably useable by the landowner. What needs to be clearly understood is can I operate my drone over someone else’s land that I do not have permission to. If I am able to fly my drones over their land, at what height do I need to be that is considered reasonable? How far am I able to go into their land? As a business owner if I do decide to operate at a high level above someone’s property I have a duty of care to ensure that I do not cause any harm to their

Trespass to land is defined as direct and intentional interference with land that belongs to the plaintiff, without the express or implied licence of the plaintiff. The issue here is whether or not the police officers entered the land without the express or implied licence of the plaintiff.

Unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) have become a quickly growing part of the aviation community over the last five to ten years. More and more of these aircraft are flying in the National Airspace System (NAS) with each passing year, without any set rules governing their operation. With the growing population of UAS in the NAS, for military, civil, and commercial use, the need for regulation is becoming increasingly obvious. How to regulate this type of aircraft is no simple task. Taking into consideration the many factors of these aircraft such as size, purpose, who is using them, and location of use, it is difficult to determine what regulation is required. That is the task that has been set before the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). To determine what type of regulation is needed to integrate and ensure the safe operation of UAS in the NAS since the skies that they share are shared with manned aircraft.

            First, we have heard that the new of the united states presence talking about the Middle East, you will hear a topic very frequently worry with drone recognition. The government will be involved in the process of trying to use drone technology in warfare. We have read information about the usages of drone missiles attacks on bad people with was done by drones.  In warfare, the usage of drone technology will be increasing. “Now drones are not gathering information, but are used to operate in combat “(“The uav”, 2012, P1).  With the use of advances in technology quickly being developed, companies are now starting to develop an opportunity to size them. They are starting to build their own things to use for was but also for people in today’s world (Wolfgang, 2012, P1). Next, drones which are known as UAVs (Un-manned Aerial Vehicles), are vehicles that do not need a person physically being there to use drones.